If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Reds Orginzational Woes

Not that it's any great shock to those paying attention over The Lost Decade, but the Reds as an organization are a mess.

Some various examples:

While there's been some small improvements in the pitching realms, generally speaking the Reds have been very weak at pitching development & coaching. How many times have we watched a pitcher flounder here only to go be effective/serviceable elsewhere? How many times have we watched pitching coaches doze on the bench when it's obvious a trip to the mound is warranted?

Talent evaluation has been suspect. This is the franchise that has targeted such luminaries as Corey Patterson, Paul Bako, Juan Castro, Deangelo Jameniz (sp?), JHJ and Edabb's favorite player of all time, Willy Taveras. Yes, the buck stops at the GM, but what about the lower level talent scouts, advisers, etc. I can't believe they didn't play some sort of role in suggesting and campaigning for these players.

Resource management. You would think it would take an act of congress to get the Reds to move players to new positions. How many years did we hear that it was impossible to move KGJ to RF? Although I've argued against it, why not move BPhil to short stop for a year to try it out? If it fails, move him back. Why was Edwin E glued to 3B when he could have at least been moved to LF as an experiment? Not saying all of these are no-brainer moves, but IMO the Reds have missed the boat in simply changing a players position to solve a problem rather than trying to bring someone new in.

Scouting: Other teams seem to have the book on us from the get go, while we seem mystified when we face other teams. It's likely more of an issue of talent and a lineup of hackers, but the advance scouting area seems weak (at best).

Ownership: We've gone from Linder who didn't seem to care, to Bozo Bob who doesn't want to deal with the reality of the state of his company. He simply refuses to understand his "win now" attitude, while admirable, isn't helping his company. Not much we can do about ownership, but it effects the organization as a whole.
-------------------------------------------------------

Each of these areas are worthy of their own separate discussions (and have been many times over the years), and I'm sure people can take issue with any or all of the examples I've given. But I don't think many people can argue that the Reds, from top to bottom, are a deeply flawed organization.

Sadly, other than simply boycotting the product, there is little as fans can do. More sadly is that the Reds are way down the list of entertainment options and for people born in the 1980's they simply don't know winning baseball in Cincy. They don't care. Meanwhile, the older folks are starting to not care.

Without something radical, I don't see how The Lost Decade isn't going to become The Lost Generations.

Last edited by Ltlabner; 08-04-2009 at 12:37 PM.

a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

Re: Reds Orginzational Woes

Scouting: Other teams seem to have the book on us from the get go, while we seem mystified when we face other teams. It's likely more of an issue of talent and a lineup of hackers, but the advance scouting area seems weak (at best).

Team Clark has touched on this one in the past. It really boggles the mind that it's so noticable from those outside the organization but the Reds can't seem to get it fixed.

Re: Reds Orginzational Woes

Originally Posted by BRM

Team Clark has touched on this one in the past. It really boggles the mind that it's so noticable from those outside the organization but the Reds can't seem to get it fixed.

It hasn't changed at all. Just watch how they pitch Phillips, Gonzo, Nix, etc. Same sequence over and over. The only chance guys have is if it's right down the middle or a hanger. Gonzo got two DREAM pitches last night. Fortunately he hit them.

It's absolutely pathetic that people can't have an opinion from actually watching games and supplementing that with stats. If you voice an opinion that doesn't fit into a black/white box you will get completely misrepresented and basically called a tobacco chewing traditionalist...

Re: Reds Orginzational Woes

Originally Posted by Team Clark

It hasn't changed at all. Just watch how they pitch Phillips, Gonzo, Nix, etc. Same sequence over and over. The only chance guys have is if it's right down the middle or a hanger. Gonzo got two DREAM pitches last night. Fortunately he hit them.

Very evident in the dugout last night when Lee was giving Wells advice on how to pitch to Reds hitters during the top half of an inning.

Re: Reds Orginzational Woes

Originally Posted by Ltlabner

Ownership: We've gone from Linder who didn't seem to care, to Bozo Bob who doesn't want to deal with the reality of the state of his company. He simply refuses to understand his "win now" attitude, while admirable, isn't helping his company.

I think that Cast just wants to help, but is too unsophisticated to actually understand what's wrong. So he changes things that don't need changing, and makes those worse. Meanwhile, the things that do need changing go unattended. Also, the GMs want to follow his lead, and do goofy things as a result even though they're good GMs.

it's tough to watch, but can't possibly change. we already have had two good GMs and so what can possibly change if ownership does not?

Re: Reds Orginzational Woes

Originally Posted by princeton

I think that Cast just wants to help, but is too unsophisticated to actually understand what's wrong. So he changes things that don't need changing, and makes those worse. Meanwhile, the things that do need changing go unattended. Also, the GMs want to follow his lead, and do goofy things as a result even though they're good GMs.

it's tough to watch, but can't possibly change. we already have had two good GMs and so what can possibly change if ownership does not?

The problem is that every owner is going to be pretty much the same. Any new owners are going to be pretty much like the old owners. Bob may care more than Carl but is caring and being incompetent any better than not caring and incompetent?

Re: Reds Orginzational Woes

My biggest beef is that this organization doesn't do anything well anymore. They have no niche. In the 70's and 80's they were great at turning toolsy guys into ballplayers. In the 90's they had a great trader. Now they have GM who's main skill is buying, and they have no money.

Re: Reds Orginzational Woes

Drafting-Scouting-Development ...

Drafting: The Reds seem to exist on the "even-a-blind-squirrel-occasionally-finds-a-nut" method. We've come up with decent players like Kearns, Dunn, Votto, Cueto, Bailey, and Bruce. But one can't help but wonder if they were accidental picks or part of an actual planned strategy.

Scouting: Seems the Reds' scouts look for apples when everyone else in baseball is looking for oranges.

Development: Guys like Austin Kearns, Homer Bailey, and Jay Bruce ought to be tearing the league up right now. You have to wonder what their ceiling would be had they been drafted by the Indians, the Braves, or some other team who knew how to develop talent.

Opinions are like belly buttons. Everybody has one, and they don't want someone else's shoved into their face.

Re: Reds Orginzational Woes

Originally Posted by Chip R

Sure he does. So did Lindner and Marge and every other owner except maybe John T. Brush. Wanting to and knowing how to are two different things.

I'm not so sure Mr. Linder was ever committed to winning. Perhaps one could make the argument because he brought Griffey in here, but he didn't fulfill his promise to bring talent around him. Linder was about the bottom line, all the time. He would have never have brought a Scott Rolen type player in here.

Re: Reds Orginzational Woes

Originally Posted by Redlegs

I'm not so sure Mr. Linder was ever committed to winning. Perhaps one could make the argument because he brought Griffey in here, but he didn't fulfill his promise to bring talent around him. Linder was about the bottom line, all the time. He would have never have brought a Scott Rolen type player in here.

Except for when he brought Ken Griffey Jr. and re-signed Barry Larkin. Those guys were "Scott Rolen type" players (if what you mean by that term is "aging perennial All-Stars").

Actually I think someone pointed out in another thread (and rightly so) that the Larkin extension might soon be seen as a precursor to the eventual Rolen extension Jocketty and others have already mentioned. If that happens, the Reds will be struggling to get out from under Rolen's deal even if they do succeed in shedding the Harang and Arroyo contracts.

This franchise never learns.

"Iíll kind of have a foot on the back of my own butt. Thatís just how I do things.Ē -- Bryan Price, 10/22/2013

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most
importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball